Giannis vs Wilt

[durantbird]

Who would you rather build around for today?

[One_and_Done]

Giannis and it's not even close, for all the reasons I've discussed before. Giannis is the prototype for the modern big. Wilt thrived in a bygone era against weak competition, to the extent he did dominate that is.

[70sFan]

It's interesting, I guess the most important thing would be Wilt's defensive translation. If he remained top tier rim protector without notable mobility issues, I think I'd bet and take his more interesting offensive game.

It's close though and I can't blame anyone taking Gianni's, he's proven after all.

[70sFan]

Giannis and it's not even close, for all the reasons I've discussed before. Giannis is the prototype for the modern big. Wilt thrived in a bygone era against weak competition, to the extent he did dominate that is.

Giannis and it's not even close, for all the reasons I've discussed before. Giannis is the prototype for the modern big. Kareem thrived in a bygone era against weak competition, to the extent he did dominate that is.

[One_and_Done]

Giannis and it's not even close, for all the reasons I've discussed before. Giannis is the prototype for the modern big. Wilt thrived in a bygone era against weak competition, to the extent he did dominate that is.

Giannis and it's not even close, for all the reasons I've discussed before. Giannis is the prototype for the modern big. Kareem thrived in a bygone era against weak competition, to the extent he did dominate that is.

Kareem and Wilt's careers only slightly overlapped, Kareem was still playing 15 years after Wilt retired, by which time the game was completely different. Kareem was also more dominant, and had a skillset better suited to dominating today.

[70sFan]

Giannis and it's not even close, for all the reasons I've discussed before. Giannis is the prototype for the modern big. Wilt thrived in a bygone era against weak competition, to the extent he did dominate that is.

Giannis and it's not even close, for all the reasons I've discussed before. Giannis is the prototype for the modern big. Kareem thrived in a bygone era against weak competition, to the extent he did dominate that is.

Kareem and Wilt's careers only slightly overlapped, Kareem was still playing 15 years after Wilt retired, by which time the game was completely different. Kareem was also more dominant, and had a skillset better suited to dominating today.

What skills exactly made Kareem better suited to dominating today?

[One_and_Done]

Giannis and it's not even close, for all the reasons I've discussed before. Giannis is the prototype for the modern big. Kareem thrived in a bygone era against weak competition, to the extent he did dominate that is.

Kareem and Wilt's careers only slightly overlapped, Kareem was still playing 15 years after Wilt retired, by which time the game was completely different. Kareem was also more dominant, and had a skillset better suited to dominating today.

What skills exactly made Kareem better suited to dominating today?

Maybe save it for the Wilt vs Kareem thread.

[70sFan]

Kareem and Wilt's careers only slightly overlapped, Kareem was still playing 15 years after Wilt retired, by which time the game was completely different. Kareem was also more dominant, and had a skillset better suited to dominating today.

What skills exactly made Kareem better suited to dominating today?

Maybe save it for the Wilt vs Kareem thread.

No, I think it's very relevant to this thread why you think Wilt's skillset doesn't translate, but another traditional big does. If you think Wilt lacked the necessary skill to thrive today, but his contemporary doesn't, then it's very relevant to this cross-era comparison.

[Mr Ringer]

It is a close one
Can't be a sure thing

I think Wilt would've been able to translate to today's game
He could definitely do it all

Wouldn't end in a 50 PPG seasons but still a great one

[penbeast0]

The 50 ppg season was something of a fluke, driven by owner/coach directives to drive up Wilt's scoring for marketing reasons and the ridiculous minutes he played. Wilt is bigger, stronger, more of a rim protector, and in an era where he wouldn't be triple teamed, he'd probably be significantly more efficient offensively with the floor stretched around him and modern coaching schemes.

I think, knowing only their potential, every GM in the NBA would take Wilt as incredible as Giannis is. There's still a mystique about the great athletic 7 footer and Wilt had LeBron level hype (for his era) coming into the NBA. Giannis was a bit of a surprise how great he was.

[theonlyclutch]

14 players were drafted ahead of Giannis, which speaks to how the draft is a crapshoot, and bears no relationship to how good the player became.

30 NBA teams could have drafted Jokic ahead of 41st too.

[70sFan]

14 players were drafted ahead of Giannis, which speaks to how the draft is a crapshoot, and bears no relationship to how good the player became.

30 NBA teams could have drafted Jokic ahead of 41st too.

Looking at them as the draft prospects is actually an interesting thought experiment though, because despite what people say I am quite comfortable that Wilt would have ended at the top of the draft in most years just based on his pure physical profile.

It doesn't mean he'd become a better player, but scouts would certainly fell in love in Wilt as a prospect.

[-Luke-]

I have no reason to believe that Wilt wouldn't be dominant today. He was an insane athlete (Giannis as well).

However, if it's reasonably close und the question is 'Who would you rather build around for today?', I choose the guy who actually plays today over the guy where I have to partially speculate how he would play today.

[tsherkin]

What skills exactly made Kareem better suited to dominating today?

Maybe save it for the Wilt vs Kareem thread.

No, I think it's very relevant to this thread why you think Wilt's skillset doesn't translate, but another traditional big does. If you think Wilt lacked the necessary skill to thrive today, but his contemporary doesn't, then it's very relevant to this cross-era comparison.

I'm with 70s here, I think it's VERY relevant.

Kareem didn't have a lot of range and he wasn't mobile on D in the same way that we see from a guy like Kevin Garnett. He was a traditional big who operated mostly in the low post, with some forays into the high post at times. He was a classic rim protector, and not as good at it as Wilt, nor was he as good on the glass.

So what is the difference between the two? Kareem struggled with big, strong guys like Moses, Lanier and Thurmond, the latter of whom played during Wilt's career, and also later on Hakeem. Hell, even old Wilt gave some trouble to Kareem.

It's hard to see a skill set reason which suggests that Wilt is so outmoded compared to someone like Kareem. And it's hard to see the same compared to someone like Shaq or Duncan, for that matter. Like, between the two, the major difference was essentially FT shooting, which is worth noting but doesn't merit the kind of hyperbole you're using here, O+D.

[iggymcfrack]

I'd vote for Giannis just because he showed more impact on winning than Wilt did over the course of his career, and I think he's more proven that way, but I also think that the era change might actually benefit Wilt. A lot of the reason Wilt failed to show impact in the '60s is that he played against what would be correct strategically during his athletic prime, focusing on dominating the scoring down low over being a balanced offensive weapon. Well, I think with modern coaching, he'd be utilized much better and his skillset may well translate to a lot more winning impact. I definitely think this is a very close question especially with the troubles Giannis has had with durability. I wouldn't fault anyone choosing either one.

[migya]

If Wilt was in college for at least two years, some time in the last ten years, therefore adapting to the current type of game, he'd be likely a better player than anyone at the moment. He was the best athlete, perhaps ever, he played both ends better than most, arguably everyone. He wasn't able to use his strength because of the rules that didn't allow physicality in his era. He could shoot rather well also. He'd be great in many facets. Giannis is great, probably second best right now after Jokic but besides handling the ball full length of the court, doesn't have anything better than Wilt.

[70sFan]

If Wilt was in college for at least two years, some time in the last ten years, therefore adapting to the current type of game, he'd be likely a better player than anyone at the moment. He was the best athlete, perhaps ever, he played both ends better than most, arguably everyone. He wasn't able to use his strength because of the rules that didn't allow physicality in his era. He could shoot rather well also. He'd be great in many facets. Giannis is great, probably second best right now after Jokic but besides handling the ball full length of the court, doesn't have anything better than Wilt.

Giannis is significantly better faceup player period and he's a better perimeter defender. It's not like these two things aren't important.

[migya]

If Wilt was in college for at least two years, some time in the last ten years, therefore adapting to the current type of game, he'd be likely a better player than anyone at the moment. He was the best athlete, perhaps ever, he played both ends better than most, arguably everyone. He wasn't able to use his strength because of the rules that didn't allow physicality in his era. He could shoot rather well also. He'd be great in many facets. Giannis is great, probably second best right now after Jokic but besides handling the ball full length of the court, doesn't have anything better than Wilt.

Giannis is significantly better faceup player period and he's a better perimeter defender. It's not like these two things aren't important.

Wilt never showed he could defend the perimeter. Again, if Wilt was growing up in this era, or just had two years of college before nba, he'd be allround.

[70sFan]

If Wilt was in college for at least two years, some time in the last ten years, therefore adapting to the current type of game, he'd be likely a better player than anyone at the moment. He was the best athlete, perhaps ever, he played both ends better than most, arguably everyone. He wasn't able to use his strength because of the rules that didn't allow physicality in his era. He could shoot rather well also. He'd be great in many facets. Giannis is great, probably second best right now after Jokic but besides handling the ball full length of the court, doesn't have anything better than Wilt.

Giannis is significantly better faceup player period and he's a better perimeter defender. It's not like these two things aren't important.

Wilt never showed he could defend the perimeter. Again, if Wilt was growing up in this era, or just had two years of college before nba, he'd be allround.

It's not impossible to show that in the 1960s though. I have no doubt that Russell would do excellent job on perimeter and I have little doubts about someone like Nate Thurmond. Wilt is a bit more complicated, because he didn't like to go out and guard shooters but also because of his mobility limitations due to immense size.

I also doubt Wilt would develop the faceup game Giannis has. Antetokumpo has absolutely amazing handles and very underrated footwork on the drives it's not something any bigman can develop with looser rules.

I don't think Wilt would need that to thrive today, but such advantages certainly exist for Giannis.

[tsherkin]

If Wilt was in college for at least two years, some time in the last ten years, therefore adapting to the current type of game, he'd be likely a better player than anyone at the moment

I don't know about that. It's possible, but with his incompetence at the line, he'd be seriously limiting himself, and we'd also have to believe he'd develop a style of play he never evidenced in his own time.

Also, it's a flat lie that he couldn't use his strength in his own time. He did it all the time.

Wilt would be excellent in this era, don't get me wrong, but attributing him the status of best right away in terms of affording him a whole new style of play doesn't really make a lot of sense. He'd likely dominate in a more conventional fashion, wielding his size in more focused ways. Teams wouldn't ask him to take 30+ FGA/g, so he could focus on being very efficient in how he played while remaining a high-end rim protector. His critical lack of basic competence at the line would remain a huge limiting factor to his overall ability, but he'd still be a top player in the league.